>
> Yeah, it's really strange. Following piece of code is called in
> non-atomic.h:
>
> static inline int test_bit(int nr, const volatile unsigned long *addr)
> {
> return 1UL & (addr[BIT_WORD(nr)] >> (nr & (BITS_PER_LONG-1)));
> }
>
> Where nr == 0 and *addr == 1, giving me really -1 return value. If I am
> right it's something like: 1 >> 0 ?
>
> You are right, "adjustment" should be major observed variable. I could
> create a channel where adjustment will be visible according to given mapping
> table. Do you have any idea how to expose mentioned mapping table? Both will
> be added in further patch.
I don't see how test_bit(0, (long[]){1}) could return -1.
Are you sure of these values ? Could you add some printk before and
after the test, and show us the trace ?
--
Corentin Chary
http://xf.iksaif.net
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-iio" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
